Nobody has been charged with violating it who was a good plaintiff yet, so no standing.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
The Conference Committee has sent official language out - h.4885
- Thread starter GOAL
- Start date
Nobody has been charged with violating it who was a good plaintiff yet, so no standing.
Correct
Either snopes happens first or we get a state case with conjure. We won on switch blades not yet on guns, that’s it.
We’ll see how the state acts when/if AWB get struck down. It’s a huger cornerstone of their anti gun platform I expect nuclear level tamper tantrum.
Mesatchornug
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 13,222
- Likes
- 27,555
It's hardly miniscule to the fraction of MA residents walking around with Restricted LTCs, nor to the folks who had previously refrained from applying because they were lead to believe it was hopeless.
pastera
NES Member
As far as legal timelines the ink hasn't even dried on that opinion
Add to that the Maryland case (Snope) up for Cert and no lower court will take action, period.
If something is filed, the boilerplate stuff will get done then the court will place the case on hold pending outcome of the similar case in a higher court.
EJFudd
NES Member
Well, here I am... a poor old man donating precious retirement money each month for lawsuits to end the Chapter 135 insanity and seeing none. I understand what you're saying, but this is getting ridiculous. Of course the state isn't going to charge a "good plaintiff" and give us the ammunition we need (no pun intended) for a really great slam-dunk lawsuit. They are evil beyond words, but they aren't stupid. The perfect "good plaintiff" may never come along the way things are going.
I must admit that I'm sorely disappointed and I'm going to stop my monthly donations unless and until I see an organization taking some substantial legal action. I wanted Chapter 135 to go down in flames before I kick the bucket. It's starting to look like that isn't going to happen.
Carry was impossible for citizens who lived in the capital of the state. Now it is possible. Because of Bruen.
That's not a small thing.
Yes. That's what a number of us have been saying. So... if you'd make a good plaintiff, then ignore the new law. The state won't ever charge you, even if they care enough to find you.
At a certain point, it's on you to disobey a bad law. The courts will eventually get there, but as you point out the state is well aware of that and will try to avoid ever having this in the courts. So my conclusion is that I don't really have to worry about the state taking me to court.
Ergo, the law has no teeth. Not really.
Everyone has their own tolerance for risk. I get that. But if Gandhi and King hadn't been willing to force the state to charge and convict them, the courts would have had no way to get ahold of those laws. It will work the same way here, unless Snopes moots this law.
pastera
NES Member
We can get standing without being charged but the whole "would do xxx if not for" stuff along with Snope up for Cert really screws things up.
pastera
NES Member
Understand and agree - you need to stick around long enough to tea bag the bitch tyrant when 135 goes down.Well, here I am... a poor old man donating precious retirement money each month for lawsuits to end the Chapter 135 insanity and seeing none. I understand what you're saying, but this is getting ridiculous. Of course the state isn't going to charge a "good plaintiff" and give us the ammunition we need (no pun intended) for a really great slam-dunk lawsuit. They are evil beyond words, but they aren't stupid. The perfect "good plaintiff" may never come along the way things are going.
I must admit that I'm sorely disappointed and I'm going to stop my monthly donations unless and until I see an organization taking some substantial legal action. I wanted Chapter 135 to go down in flames before I kick the bucket. It's starting to look like that isn't going to happen.
Snope could very well take down a large portion of 135 - what it won't touch is the ERPO and registration crap.
ERPO is tough to fight because the state can simply moot any case involving a good plaintiff - I know a guy that lost his guns because he asked his tenant for rent month after month. Harassment filed, issued and guns taken. As soon as he was able to hit court things were reversed but that took some time. He would have been a perfect plaintiff but the case was moot the instant the presiding judge toss it at the hearing.
The assault-style stuff is likely a better match for a state level challenge under Canjura - but that would need to be carefully planned in private and with the right plaintiff. The ambiguous exemptions on ASFs make it a hard case for many of us that have exempt guns. We need a new licensee that is immaculate - a prior service female moving into Mass wanting to bring a collection might be a good case but those aren't a dime a dozen.
HorizontalHunter
NES Member
That’s why these are so screwed up. You get charged, the order gets issued, you lose your constitutional rights, and your property without ever getting a chance to defend yourself.
Am also willing to bet that the tenant that made the false claim got away with it with no consequences.
Right fraction of 1%
We only make up 5% of the pop in this state …that’s the definition of minuscule.
Had permits themselves being ruled unconstitutional then that would have been big!
Then why are you taking a victory lap like Conjura changed anything ? Conjura got us knives , has yet to effect guns.
Irreparable harm due to loss of rights by a "false claim". Rosa Parks right there. COMM2A?
Would you have preferred MA left its Boston and Springfield licenses restricted, then? Or if the state was still may-issue?
Would you have been happier if MA had thumbed its nose at Bruen?
Your problem with permits not being ruled unconstitutional is not a problem with MA. It's a problem with SCOTUS. We commented on that at length when it happened, in the Bruen thread, but that was before you were here. Head on over there and do some reading; you'll find many of your concerns have already been addressed here on NES. That's one of the reasons some of us don't feel like typing it all out again for you.
Again the May to shall change was minuscule
It was acceptable to .gov here, because it didn’t not change any ground level. Ok so few municipalities have to give unrestricted,
Well see true compliance when/if AWB gets struck down. Changing a subset of a subset is nothing…knocking out entire sections of mgl is big.
And yes SC was mealy mouthed in Bruen, it should have gone further!
JDL
NES Member
Well Springfield will issue ALP LTC's, however they have made it harder to apply. Springfield now requires training with live fire. I had three people request a LTC class that lived in Springfield. I explained to them that Springfield would not accept the 4 hour NRA Home Firearm Safety and would have to take the 8hr NRA Basic Pistol Class. They all felt it was too.much of a hassle and decided not to bother pursuing an LTC. I am sure this is something that happens often and discourages people in Springfield to bother to apply.
So the fact that THOUSANDS of people are now unrestricted because of Bruen is irrelevant?
Wow.
This is par for the course for the NES whining toddler club though.
pastera
NES Member
Did you read it?
If not, go read it and several of the pre-Bruen 2a opinions from the SJC, then come back and support your position.
Tossing out shit like "it got us knives" and "has yet to effect guns" is not helpfull and borders on ignorant childish ranting.
pastera
NES Member
The person would tick off quite a few boxes but I don't think they are willing to rock the boat that much.
This is the statistical truth. It's very easy to fall into a thought bubble or patterned way of thinking on issues like this, but if you look at that data, it's fairly clear that (a) pursuing weapons violations against otherwise good standing citizens is of low priority and (b), the more local and national legal evidence that mounts against certain elements of the laws , the lower the likelihood of those charges - as standalone charges - being brought against people in good standing.
If people left their thought bubble and asked police and those who work in the DA offices - the people operating at the primary enforcement level - if their machinations, fetishizations, and romantic thoughts about getting screwed by these laws just because the laws exist, they would quickly find out that speculation and worrying about what could happen is a poor choice of time. Because nothing happens. It's not that someone somewhere doesn't want it to happen, it's just not possible, practical, or financially feasible.
You can always tell how serious a state is at enacting and enforcing its laws by how much money they allocate towards the perceived problem. How much money has been allocated towards firearms enforcement in the past two years?
As with anything, there are smart and stupid ways to practice disobedience.
Mesatchornug
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 13,222
- Likes
- 27,555
As of October, that's not Springfield; it's MA. We must teach a live fire course to comply with the new law even though we don't have to cover the other material that's required, as the state hasn't generated it yet.
JDL
NES Member
You are absolutely incorrect. The new training has not been developed yet and all current training is acceptable at this time until the new training has been developed. This is why most of the towns are still accepting NRA Home Firearm Safety and Boston is currently no longer requiring the Moon Island live Fire to get an LTC. Unfortunately, there are some towns and cities that have decided to chance the current rules before the new training is available. I know as a fact that Wilbraham and Hampden along with many other cities and towns are still accepting NRA Home Firearms Safety.
Mesatchornug
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 13,222
- Likes
- 27,555
Here's Kristin's reply about teaching a class back in October
I would love to be wrong here.
Boston stopped requiring Moon Island during lockdowns
Did he get them back after?
JDL
NES Member
These are the newest Guidance from the state.
MEMORANDUM TERRENCE M. REIDY Secretary Law Enforcement Agencies, Licensing Authorities, Licensed Firearms Dealers, Firearms Instructors, LTC and FID holders, and all other Interested Parties FROM: The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security DATE: November 14, 2024 RE: An Act Modernizing Firearm Laws – Guidance #3 The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS) and its agencies continue to work on implementing Chapter 135 of the Acts of 2024, An Act modernizing firearm laws (Act), that took effect on October 2, 2024. We understand that many questions remain about the new law, and therefore we will continue to provide updated guidance periodically as new systems and policies are developed and various provisions of the new law go into effect. Below is a list of “Frequently Asked Questions” which includes the answers that were previously provided in
Guidance #1 and Guidance #2. Frequently Asked Questions 1. When will the new BFS course be ready? a. EOPSS is diligently working with the MSP and the MPTC to operationalize the requirements of section 74 of the Act, including the new curriculum requirements for the BFS course, in accordance with the deadlines prescribed by the new law.
2. May a licensing authority accept a basic firearms safety certificate pursuant to the requirements of the current law prior to the Act taking effect? a. Yes, and a licensing authority may continue to do so until section 74 takes effect, on April 2, 2026.
3. If I was issued an FID or LTC after August 1, 2024, but before the law became effective on October 2, 2024, will I have to take a new BFS course and complete the live fire requirement when I renew my license? a. Yes, but only if you applied for the permit or license after August 1, 2024. 4. I am a BFS instructor. What are the new requirements for the issuance of satisfactory basic safety firearms certificate? a. Course instructors will be required to upload copies of completed certificates to the MIRCS Portal created by DCJIS. Individuals who completed the course will have access to the certificate via the MIRCS Portal. Specific information will be forthcoming. These requirements will not take effect until early 2026. 5.
MEMORANDUM TERRENCE M. REIDY Secretary Law Enforcement Agencies, Licensing Authorities, Licensed Firearms Dealers, Firearms Instructors, LTC and FID holders, and all other Interested Parties FROM: The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security DATE: September 30, 2024 RE: An Act Modernizing Firearm Laws The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS) and its agencies are in the process of developing plans to implement Chapter 135 of the Acts of 2024, An Act modernizing firearm laws (Act), signed into law by Governor Healey on July 25, 2024. We understand that many individuals, including licensed firearms dealers, law enforcement officers, advocates, and others have questions and concerns about the new firearm laws. We hope that the information provided in this memorandum will allay some of these concerns, particularly concerns relating to the ability of individuals to obtain firearm identification (FID) cards and licenses to carry (LTC) now and in the near future, and the ability of licensed firearms dealers to continue to sell firearms. We will continue to provide guidance and relevant information as various provisions of the new law go into effect. The new law strengthens the Commonwealth’s firearms laws in several critical areas, in addition to enhancing the basic firearms safety (BFS) course and including a live fire requirement. Section 74 of the Act requires the Colonel of the Massachusetts State Police (MSP), in consultation with the Municipal Police Training Committee (MPTC), to set minimum requirements for BFS courses according to specific criteria specified in the Act. The Act provides that, “[p]ersons lawfully possessing a firearm identification card or license to carry firearms on August 1, 2024, shall be exempt from this section upon expiration of such card or license and when applying for renewal of such licensure as required under this chapter; provided, however, that persons possessing a firearms identification card or license to carry firearms prior to the implementation of live firearms trainings as required in this section shall also be exempted from such requirement.” On September 16, 2024, the Governor signed, An Act Making Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2024 to Provide for Supplementing Certain Existing Appropriations and for Certain other Activities and Projects, which amended the effective date of section 74 of the new firearms law. The new requirements for the BFS course contained in section 74 will not become effective until 18 months following the Act taking effect. Until section 74 takes effect, local licensing authorities should continue to accept and process applications for FID cards and LTC’s in the ordinary course, consistent with the governing law. Pursuant to the Act, any person who has been issued a firearms identification card or license to carry on or before August 1, 2024, will not be required to complete the new BFS requirements or the live fire component, including when seeking to renew the card or license. The MSP, in conjunction with the MPTC, is in the process of developing curriculum to address the new BFS requirements. Individuals who apply for an FID or LTC after August 1, 2024, but before section 74 goes into effect, may be issued an FID or LTC if the applicant is otherwise eligible under the law. Individuals issued an FID or LTC during this period (August 1, 2024 - effective date of section 74) will not be required to take a new BFS course, including the live fire component, until they seek to renew their FID or LTC. The Secretary of EOPSS, pursuant to section 131 ¾ of chapter 140 of the General Laws, is
MEMORANDUM TERRENCE M. REIDY Secretary Law Enforcement Agencies, Licensing Authorities, Licensed Firearms Dealers, Firearms Instructors, LTC and FID holders, and all other Interested Parties FROM: The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security DATE: November 14, 2024 RE: An Act Modernizing Firearm Laws – Guidance #3 The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS) and its agencies continue to work on implementing Chapter 135 of the Acts of 2024, An Act modernizing firearm laws (Act), that took effect on October 2, 2024. We understand that many questions remain about the new law, and therefore we will continue to provide updated guidance periodically as new systems and policies are developed and various provisions of the new law go into effect. Below is a list of “Frequently Asked Questions” which includes the answers that were previously provided in
Guidance #1 and Guidance #2. Frequently Asked Questions 1. When will the new BFS course be ready? a. EOPSS is diligently working with the MSP and the MPTC to operationalize the requirements of section 74 of the Act, including the new curriculum requirements for the BFS course, in accordance with the deadlines prescribed by the new law.
2. May a licensing authority accept a basic firearms safety certificate pursuant to the requirements of the current law prior to the Act taking effect? a. Yes, and a licensing authority may continue to do so until section 74 takes effect, on April 2, 2026.
3. If I was issued an FID or LTC after August 1, 2024, but before the law became effective on October 2, 2024, will I have to take a new BFS course and complete the live fire requirement when I renew my license? a. Yes, but only if you applied for the permit or license after August 1, 2024. 4. I am a BFS instructor. What are the new requirements for the issuance of satisfactory basic safety firearms certificate? a. Course instructors will be required to upload copies of completed certificates to the MIRCS Portal created by DCJIS. Individuals who completed the course will have access to the certificate via the MIRCS Portal. Specific information will be forthcoming. These requirements will not take effect until early 2026. 5.
MEMORANDUM TERRENCE M. REIDY Secretary Law Enforcement Agencies, Licensing Authorities, Licensed Firearms Dealers, Firearms Instructors, LTC and FID holders, and all other Interested Parties FROM: The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security DATE: September 30, 2024 RE: An Act Modernizing Firearm Laws The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS) and its agencies are in the process of developing plans to implement Chapter 135 of the Acts of 2024, An Act modernizing firearm laws (Act), signed into law by Governor Healey on July 25, 2024. We understand that many individuals, including licensed firearms dealers, law enforcement officers, advocates, and others have questions and concerns about the new firearm laws. We hope that the information provided in this memorandum will allay some of these concerns, particularly concerns relating to the ability of individuals to obtain firearm identification (FID) cards and licenses to carry (LTC) now and in the near future, and the ability of licensed firearms dealers to continue to sell firearms. We will continue to provide guidance and relevant information as various provisions of the new law go into effect. The new law strengthens the Commonwealth’s firearms laws in several critical areas, in addition to enhancing the basic firearms safety (BFS) course and including a live fire requirement. Section 74 of the Act requires the Colonel of the Massachusetts State Police (MSP), in consultation with the Municipal Police Training Committee (MPTC), to set minimum requirements for BFS courses according to specific criteria specified in the Act. The Act provides that, “[p]ersons lawfully possessing a firearm identification card or license to carry firearms on August 1, 2024, shall be exempt from this section upon expiration of such card or license and when applying for renewal of such licensure as required under this chapter; provided, however, that persons possessing a firearms identification card or license to carry firearms prior to the implementation of live firearms trainings as required in this section shall also be exempted from such requirement.” On September 16, 2024, the Governor signed, An Act Making Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2024 to Provide for Supplementing Certain Existing Appropriations and for Certain other Activities and Projects, which amended the effective date of section 74 of the new firearms law. The new requirements for the BFS course contained in section 74 will not become effective until 18 months following the Act taking effect. Until section 74 takes effect, local licensing authorities should continue to accept and process applications for FID cards and LTC’s in the ordinary course, consistent with the governing law. Pursuant to the Act, any person who has been issued a firearms identification card or license to carry on or before August 1, 2024, will not be required to complete the new BFS requirements or the live fire component, including when seeking to renew the card or license. The MSP, in conjunction with the MPTC, is in the process of developing curriculum to address the new BFS requirements. Individuals who apply for an FID or LTC after August 1, 2024, but before section 74 goes into effect, may be issued an FID or LTC if the applicant is otherwise eligible under the law. Individuals issued an FID or LTC during this period (August 1, 2024 - effective date of section 74) will not be required to take a new BFS course, including the live fire component, until they seek to renew their FID or LTC. The Secretary of EOPSS, pursuant to section 131 ¾ of chapter 140 of the General Laws, is
pastera
NES Member
Yes, but did have to fight with the local, very green, police to do so.
I know you're a teacher but I'm not sure why you're bothering, he wants to think his way.
pastera
NES Member
The law as written doesn’t require the new training until developed - but that doesnt stop them from implementing extra-legal requirements
JDL
NES Member
Legal, yes imposing, and unessarry right now, yes, currently not required by the state, designed only to discourage applicants.
Boston Gun & Rifle will do live fire certification for MA residents who are required to do so.
Residents can take the Basic Firearms Safety class anywhere they like.
Live Fire Qualification | Boston Gun & Rifle
Get live fire certified to fulfill your local PD's LTC application requirements.
www.bostongunandrifle.com
Get Your Gun License | Boston Gun & Rifle
We offer public range sessions, gun licensing classes, training and more! Book a session with us today!
www.bostongunandrifle.com
JDL
NES Member
I can do live fire too and i do offer NRA Basic Pistol. Or if the town only requires live fire i will do NRA Home Firearms Safety with a live fire quilifacation. For Springfield they specify a live fire program ie. NRA Basic Pistol.. That was not the issue. They just didn't want to spend the time it takes to do live fire. In any case it is still an
8hrs. Class even if it is NRA Home Firearms Safety and range live fire qualifying or NRA Basic Pistol.
Last edited:
